YOU HAVE THE POWER TO EFFECT HUGE CHANGE$BY THE WAY YOU $PENDYOUR HARD EARNED DOLLAR$

Shhhhhhhh Did you hear about the

MARCH AGAINST MONSANTO ON MAY 25, or the one on October 12, 2013?

MANY of my friends didn't either.

It created a wonderful opportunity to reveal how our media is influenced / silenced by corporate interests.

WHAT IS A GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM (GMO) EXACTLY?

A genetically modified organism (GMO) or genetically engineered organism (GEO) is an organismwhose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. These techniques, generally known as recombinant DNA technology, use DNA molecules from different sources, which are combined into one molecule to create a new set of genes.

This DNA is then transferred into an organism, giving it modified or novel genes. Transgenic organisms, a subset of GMOs, are organisms which have inserted DNA that originated in a different species.

Genetic engineering is a radical technology that forces genetic information across the protective species barrier in an unnatural way. By being able to take the genetic material from one organism and insert it into the permanent genetic code of another, biotechnologists have engineered numerous novel creations.

At an alarming rate, these creations are and have been patented and released into the environment. Pollinators (bees, beetles, butterflies, etc) are eating and absorbing these chemical creations and we humans are eating them.

This page is about how all this is effecting EVERYTHING from the soil, plant life, animal life, and OUR HEALTH.

This is a powerful video outlining the devastating effects of genetically modified foods on the planets ecosystem and agriculture in general, how the avalanche of patents given to companies have effected average farmers.............and

how they effect you.

GMO food is not considered a "natural commodity for consumption" by the UN's regulatory body (Codex); scientists have purposefully introduced spermicidal modifications into corn ; what else haven't we been told.

Biopharmaceuticals, or biopharms for short, produce industrial and pharmaceutical chemicals within their tissues; a new kind of GM crops.

The plants, including soy, rice, corn, cottonseed and tobacco, are genetically altered to produce substances such as

There is also an ongoing battle between citizens and the FDA to demand labeling of GMO based food products. Although the public wants labeling, they currently have no right to know what is in their food. Many biotech companies like Monsanto; Bayer; Snygenta; Dow; ... are spending millions of dollars to thwart labeling initiatives.

Since GMO based products are not considered food under UN regulations,

many questions still remain as to the reasons why the FDA allows them in consumable foods at all.

Smith documents how consumption of genetically modified foods has been directly linked with reproductive problems, immune system deficiencies, accelerated aging, organ damage and gastrointestinal problems. The immune system problem has been seen consistently in mice and rats who are fed GMO food, explains Smith, and now since humans have started consuming genetically modified foods, auto-immune diseases and allergies have increased.

Institute for Responsible Technology

The most comprehensive source of GMO health risk information on the web.

GMO created foods may be used as a biological weapon ?

A report published on May 28, 2011 tied together that the international organization Codex, which is seeking to regulate every food, mineral, and herb in the world used for consumption, does not consider GMO created products as food, and thus they are being placed in a separate sphere of attributes that can be used for alternative functions....

Including birth control and creating infertility in a nation or population.

One of the world's oldest varieties of maize has been "contaminated" by genetically modified organisms, say US researchers who have had their work confirmed by the Mexican government.

The findings in the Sierra Norte de Oaxaca region will stoke the row about whether it is possible to control GM crops and their potential threat to genetic diversity.

The group of researchers from the University of California, Berkeley, detected the contamination in October last year while working with a biological laboratory in the region. They compared indigenous corn with samples known to be free from genetic engineering, as well as with genetically modified varieties.

Their results, published yesterday (2001) in the science journal Nature, showed that four of six samples of native criollo corn taken from fields contained a genetic "switch" commonly used in GM crops, and that two of the samples were found to have another DNA segment commonly inserted by genetic engineers. A further sample contained a commonly inserted gene that prompts the plant to produce a poison.

The researchers alerted the Mexican government which did its own tests in 22 communities. They confirmed in September this year that transgenic DNA had been found in 13 of them, with contamination of between 3% and 10%.

The results are surprising because Mexico, which is the genetic home of maize, has banned the growing of GM maize since 1998, and the last known GM crops grown in the region were almost 60 miles from where the contaminated maize was found.

It was not clear yesterday when the contamination took place, but the scientists speculated that it originated from GM maize bought from the US as food aid for the impoverished region in central Mexico, and had progressed over time via multiple pollinations.

It is not thought that that the cross-pollination happened over long distances, because corn pollen is heavy and does not travel far on the wind.

"I repeated the tests at least three times to make sure I wasn't getting false-positives," the lead author of the report, David Quist, said. "It was initially hard to believe that corn in such a remote region would have tested positive."

"This is very serious," said Ignacio Chapela, assistant professor of microbial ecology at Berkeley's College of Natural Resources, "because the regions where our samples were taken are known for their diverse varieties of native corn, which is something that absolutely needs to be protected. We can't afford to lose that resource."

But Luis Solleiro, director of the Mexican biotechnology trade association, denied that the country's rich genetic diversity was threatened. "The data suggests that any transgenic corn is at a very low level," he said. "This level, or even greater presence, would not adversely affect the genetic diversity of native strains."

Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and other groups that oppose GM crops argued that even a low level of genetic contamination was highly significant in a center of diversity and origin.

"The genetic contamination is likely to multiply through pollen flow and spread further to other traditional varieties and wild relatives growing in the area", Doreen Stabinsky, from Greenpeace USA, said.

"This is likely to be only the tip of the iceberg, as plants in other parts of Mexico have not yet been investigated."

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization is concerned that GM crops may pollute the gene pool of conventional relatives in the same area or nearby, depending on wind and insects. "If there is no barrier to pollination, you get this potential hazard," said Ricardo Labrada Romero, the FAO's plant protection officer.

The research adds to concerns that GM crops may be out of control. The Canadian government's agricultural department last month reported that stray pollen and seed from genetically modified oilseed rape crops was now so widespread that it was difficult to grow conventional or organic strains without them being contaminated.

More than 100m acres [33m hectares] of GM crops have been grown, mostly in the US and Canada.

Before now, genetic engineering has been used widely in agriculture to make crops resistant to pests and herbicides, in the development of microbes to produce pharmaceuticals for human and animal use, and in food to produce microorganisms used in baking, brewing and cheese making.

While various organizations have been working to develop genetically modified animals, such as the University of Guelph's "Enviropig" - which more easily digests plant phosphorous, thus excreting less of it into the environment - AquAdvantage® Salmon would be the first to be approved by the FDA for use as food.

The fish's rapid growth will be boosted by the injection of a combination of a growth gene (GH-coding sequences) from the Pacific Chinook salmon and genetic material (the AFP gene) from the ocean pout - a large, eel-like fish - into the fertilized eggs of Atlantic salmon, making the recombined DNA present in cells throughout the body of the fish. The Chinook gene promotes the growth to market size, and the pout gene allows the fish to grow in the winter as well as the summer.

AquaBounty Technologies claims the resultant fish are reproductively sterile** due to another genetic alteration - triploidy - that eliminates the possibility of interbreeding amongst themselves or with other native breeds, while maintaining protection over intellectual property. The company will only sell female eggs and raise the fish within contained, inland systems. However, despite these assurances, the FDA indicates that up to 5% of the eggs may indeed be fertile, and the company's claims in this regard are "potentially misleading."

ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH BIRTH CONTROL RATES OF ONLY 95% WITH THESE RISKS ?

**The "compelling economic benefit to FARMERS" did not work out so well for planted crops that were GM as the farmers now are dealing with weeds and pests that have become resistant; forcing use of more and stronger pesticides and herbicides than ever before.

Will the FDA again rely on research studies done by the very companies promoting their products, YET AGAIN??

Despite these long-term and wide-ranging risks, Congress has yet to pass a single law intended to manage them responsibly. This despite the fact that our regulatory agencies have failed to adequately address the human health or environmental impacts of genetic engineering. On the federal level, eight agencies attempt to regulate biotechnology using 12 different statutes or laws that were written long before genetically engineered food, animals and insects became a reality. The result has been a regulatory tangle, where any regulation even exists, as existing laws are grossly manipulated to manage threats they were never intended to regulate. Among many bizarre examples of these regulatory anomalies is the current attempt by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate genetically engineered fish as “new animal drugs.” Yet, at the same time, the FDA claims it has no jurisdiction over genetically engineered pet fish like the Glofish.

As revealed in this week's leaked minutes, the government's commitment to GM crops is unswerving. Revealed once more, too, is its arrogance; for it acknowledges public resistance but hopes that "opposition might eventually be worn down by solid, authoritative scientific argument". Most worrying of all, though, is the truly astonishing ignorance of people in high places.

The arguments for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that have been dinned into us for 15 years are based on an almost sublime misreading of the world's food problems. Indeed, GMOs are part of a political and economic trend that is threatening all humanity.

The crucial claim for GM crops is that they are necessary. They can out-yield traditional varieties, and can be made especially rich in protein and vitamins. The world's population is rising fast and without GM, the story has it, famine and increasing deficiency are inevitable. To oppose their development is to be effete to the point of wickedness.

THE LIES - MORE ON DAMAGING EFFECTS ON HUMANS

Toxic pesticides which are implanted into genetically modified food crops have lodged in the blood of pregnant women and their unborn babies. A landmark new study out of Canada exposes yet another lie propagated by the biotechnology industry, this time blowing a hole in the false claim that a certain genetic pesticide used in the cultivation of genetically-modified (GM) crops does not end up in the human body upon consumption.

Researchers from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Sherbrooke Hospital Centre in Quebec, Can., have proven that Bt toxin, which is used in GM corn and other crops, definitively makes its way into the blood supply, contrary to what Big Bio claims -- and this toxin was found in the bloodstreams of 93 percent of pregnant women tested.

Published in the journal Reproductive Toxicology, the study explains that Bt toxin enters the body not only through direct consumption of GMOs, but also from consumption of meat, milk and eggs from animals whose feed contains GMOs. Among all women tested, 80 percent of the pregnant group tested positive for Bt toxin in their babies' umbilical cords, and 69 percent of non-pregnant women tested positive for Bt toxin.

The only reason many countries even approved GM crops in the first place was because they were told that GM crops were no different than conventional crops. The biotechnology industry has purported for years that the alterations and chemicals used in GM crop cultivation pose no risk whatsoever to human health, and that any GM substances that remain in food are broken down in the digestive system*. Now that it has been revealed that such claims are complete fabrications, many groups are urging governments to pull GMOs from their food supplies.

"This research is a major surprise as it shows that the Bt proteins have survived the human digestive system and passed into the blood supply -- something that regulators said could not happen," said Pete Riley from GM Freeze, an alliance of organizations united against GMOs. "Regulators need to urgently reassess their opinions, and the EU should use the safeguard clauses in the regulations to prevent any further GM Bt crops being cultivated or imported for animal feed or food until the potential health implications have been fully evaluated."

Most of the studies that have been used to validate the safety of GMOs have been conducted by the companies that created them in the first place, so they are hardly a credible source for reliable safety data. Governments in North and South America, as well as throughout Europe, have essentially welcomed GMOs into the food supply based on flimsy reassurances rather than sound science.

*GM firms claimed toxins were destroyed in the gut. Most of the global research which has been used to demonstrate the safety of GM crops has been funded by the industry itself. Apparently the FDA also accepts these claims for Americans.

WASHINGTON -- Industry regulators have known for years that Roundup, the world's best-selling herbicide produced by U.S. company Monsanto, causes birth defects, according to a new report released Tuesday.

The report, "Roundup and birth defects: Is the public being kept in the dark?" found regulators knew as long ago as 1980 that glyphosate, the chemical on which Roundup is based, can cause birth defects in laboratory animals.

Huber also commented on the herbicide itself, saying: "It is well-documented that glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases; it dismantles plant defenses by chelating vital nutrients; and it reduces the bioavailability of nutrients in feed, which in turn can cause animal disorders."

Although glyphosate was originally due to be reviewed in 2012, the Commission decided late last year not to bring the review forward, instead delaying it until 2015. The chemical will not be reviewed under more stringent, up-to-date standards until 2030.

Monsanto is facing super weeds and a marketing problem: Roundup (R) is no longer as “effective” as it used to be in killing off super weeds which have now acquired the genes from the pollen of the GMO seeds and are becoming Roundup (R) resistant.

Not only are chemicals from GMOs already showing up in our pregnant women and unborn children already; now we have the added concern of ‘Agent Orange.’ ‘Dioxin.’

The very words bring a shudder of horror – horror for the damage to our troops and their offspring that Monsanto’s (and Dow Chemical’s) chemical weapons inflicted on Americans, horror for the ecological devastation that the herbicide/defoliant inflicted on the ecosystem of South East Asia, from which recovery is far from certain over the next thousand years, horror for the devastation brought to the Vietnamese people, both friend and foe, whose lives – and deaths – have been so hideously distorted by US weaponry… and horror for the decades of denial and whitewash imposed by the US Government about its prior knowledge of the devastating effects of dioxin on the living and the unborn, on the biosphere and on life for untold generations to come. This ‘Prior knowledge’ is the very definition of a crime against humanity. The world looks with horror at the horror wrought by the US in Viet Nam because of its use of Agent Orange. And now, the very people who, along with Dow Chemical) brought us this horror half a world away are bringing it all back home.

Agent Orange is a mixture of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, manufactured by Monsanto. Our Foundation President, General Bert, is a Viet Nam vet whose Agent Orange exposure there has given him cancer 3 separate times- 3 separate, unrelated cancers – while the US Government denied any connection to any ongoing or sustained damage from Agent Orange, while the Veteran’s Administration, the FDA and the US Congress denied what they knew and allowed untold suffering and death. Finally, decades later, after many of the Agent Orange-injured service men and women were dead, they were forced to acknowledge that there is a strong relationship between Agent Orange and cancer, birth defects and a host of other deadly and life-damaging disorders and conditions.

GM SOY: The invisible ingredient 'poisoning' children

The home of Petrona Villasboa is surrounded by genetically modified (GM) soy fields. The golden crop looks like a bumper harvest but for her it is a symbol of death.

"What Else is Wrong with Genetic Modification?"

Crops which have been Genetically Modified to resist herbicides encourage the use of larger quantities of herbicide, with the effect that both weeds and beneficial plants are killed indiscriminately. These herbicides are harmful to both the environment and to humans.

Crops which have been Genetically Modified to contain their own insecticide, such as Bt, cause insects to become resistant to the insecticide.

Genetically Modified plants may crossbreed with wild species to produce "superweeds", which cannot be eliminated using standard herbicides.

The use of Genetically Modified seed encourages dependence by the farmers on a single seed supplier and may involve the purchase of both the seed and herbicide from one supplier. Seed companies impose 'licensing agreements' for the seed which forbid the farmer from replanting seed from one year to the next.

Toxic compounds such as glyphosate (RoundUp) and Bromoxynil are used on Genetically Modified crops. The US Environmental Protection Agency has approved the use of Bromoxynil despite acknowledging "...serious concerns about developmental risks to infants and children."

The nature of genetic modification and long term effects are not well understood as these products have not been properly tested before being released into the environment. For example, in the USA, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved the use of all currently approved Genetically Modified crops based on data supplied by the manufacturers.

Genetic material inserted into plants can transfer to animals and humans in the intestinal wall.

Crops which have been Genetically Modified to resist insects kill not just the "target insect" (such as the borer or weevil) but beneficial insects (such as the Monarch butterfly). They also threaten the habitats of other animals, such as birds.

Crops which have been Genetically Modified to produce pharmaceuticals can contaminate the food supply.

The U.S. fallaciously considers GMOs equal to non-GMOs solely based on a 1992 Executive Order from then-president George H. W. Bush, therefore no pre-market safety testing occurs on any GMOs before they are released into the food chain in the U.S. The FDA refuses to review any safety data except for a single, preliminary review early in the organism's development from its manufacturer.

Do you remember from school how pollination works? We all learn it in grade school.

To be pollinated, pollen must be moved from a stamen (the male part of the flower) to the stigma (the female part).

When pollen from a plant's stamen is transferred to that same plant's stigma, it is called self-pollination. When pollen from a plant's stamen is transferred to a different plant's stigma, it is called cross-pollination. Cross-pollination produces stronger plants.

It would be a world without flowers, fruit, even a cup of coffee. A world, even, without chocolate!

Thanks to the wonderful work of bees, butterflies, birds, and other animal pollinators, the world's flowering plants are able to reproduce and bear fruit, providing the foods that we eat , the plant materials we and other organisms use, and the beauty we see around us.

Yet today, there is evidence indicating alarming pollinator population declines worldwide according to the National Biological Information Infrastructure.

So much of our agricultural productivity is dependent on the European honey bee (Apris melifera) that it is no wonder that our attention is drawn to their plight. When the honey bee suffers, so does agriculture, and so, potentially do all who depend on the bounty that comes from animal pollinated angiosperms, the flowering plants from which we derive many of our most delicious and health-giving fruits and vegetables.

While honey bees are clearly not the only hard working pollinators that deliver a bounty to humans and other animals, their recent deaths from Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) starting in 2006 have captured the world’s attention.

Domesticated honey bees are not the only pollinators in trouble these days. Many species of butterflies, moths, birds, bats and other pollinators are also in retreat, threatening not only the production of commercial crops but also a wide range of flowering plants, including rare and endangered species.

"Action must be taken to reverse these trends," says Stephen Buchmann, an entomologist formerly with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Carl Hayden Bee Research Center in Tucson, Arizona. According to Buchmann, only a few of these pollinators (mainly Hawaiian bird species) are protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act. "This is simply because the world is focused on the charismatic megafauna--the lions and tigers and bears," he says. "The little things that run the world, including bees, butterflies, bats and hummingbirds, go unnoticed and unprotected until it is sometimes too late."

Following the appearance of Colony Collapse Disorder in 2007, the effect on honey bee health was questioned for all chemicals used around bee hives. A relatively new class of insecticides, the neonicotinoids, was highly suspected by many beekeepers as being involved in CCD and honey bee health problems. Among these systemic insecticides are imidacloprid and clothianidin. Of particular concern is the effect upon the bees of a less than lethal dose of a neonicotinoid insecticide when combined with certain honey bee viruses or the newly detected strain of Nosema disease. In the neonicotinoid family of pesticides, clothianidin gets "taken up by a plant's vascular system and expressed through pollen and nectar.

In April 2003, the EFED granted Bayer "conditional" approval to sell its product. The "condition" placed by EPA scientists was that Bayer must conduct a "chronic life cycle study" of the pesticide’s effect on bee populations by December 2004. With their "conditional registration" in hand, Bayer introduced clothianidin to the U.S. market in spring 2003. Farmers throughout the Corn Belt planted seeds treated with clothianidin, and billions of plants began producing pollen rich with this toxic pesticide.

In March 2004, Bayer requested an extension of the study deadline and the EPA granted the chemical company until May 2005 to complete its research. After a series of delays, requests, and extensions, the study was not completed until August 2007. Unfortunately, this long-awaited study was deeply flawed for several reasons.

This brings us to the back now to the emergence of Colony Collapse Disorder in 2007.

The impact of neonicotinoid insecticides on bumblebees, Honey bees and other non-target invertebrates 2009 (The above chart come from this document - additional data has been requested from the author regarding the use of Clothianidin.)

Clothianidin is a highly controversial pesticide. It has been banned in France, Italy, Slovenia and, ironically, even Bayer's home country, Germany.

Like other members of the neonicotinoid family of pesticides, clothianidin gets "taken up by a plant's vascular system and expressed through pollen and nectar," according to Pesticide Action Network of North America (PANNA). That effect makes it highly toxic to a crop's pests — and specifically harmful to pollen-hoarding honeybees, which have experienced mysterious annual massive die-offs (known as colony collapse disorder) here in the United States since at least 2006. So the honeybees feasting on the bounty of pollen produced by the millions of acres of corn are also directly ingesting the toxic pesticide.

According to the German Federal Agriculture Institute, "It can unequivocally be concluded that poisoning of the bees is due to the rub-off of the pesticide ingredient clothianidin from corn seeds."

The U.S. should join these nations in banning a lethal pesticide that poses serious risks to our environment.

More than thirty six years in the beekeeping business, this is the gentleman who uncovered the "leaked document" regarding the life cycle study debacle of the EPA. The life cycle study was supposed to have been completed during the first growing season of 2003 and delivered to the EPA by the of December 2004; BUT WAS NOT COMPLETED until August of 2006 and not review by the EPA for another 15 months despite the concerns. The study was determined not to be scientifically sound.

Tom is frequently is asked, What can we do to help?. "The greatest contribution people can make is take the time and energy to understand the issues so that as we debate these questions in public we have an informed public who can engage in those discussions." He recommends the following three sites for reference:

Neonicotinoids, a class of insecticides that attack insects' central nervous systems, are increasingly being linked to killing off bees, bats and other pollinators that are essential for growing food. And a two-year-old report just now being released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) adds to the growing body of evidence that these toxic insecticides are a serious threat to not only bees, but also to humans.

It is now widely known that neonicotinoids are a highly-dangerous neurotoxin that absorbs systemically into plants, meaning it makes its way throughout the entire plant, including into the pollen and nectar that bees eat. And these neurotoxins are also a threat to mammals, which includes humans.

Last month, a leaked document revealed that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) knowingly approved, and continued to allow approval for, neonicotinoids, despite the fact that they knew the chemicals killed bees. The agency even knew that Bayer CropScience, the purveyor of most of the neonicotinoids used today, had falsified safety data to get them approved in the first place.Now it has been revealed that USDA scientists also knew about the dangers associated with neonicotinoids. So why did it take two years for the USDA report to see the light of day? Dr. Jeffrey Pettis and researchers from the U.S. government bee laboratory in Maryland, authors of the USDA study, did not provide an answer to this question. They did admit to the U.K. Independent, however, that their study "has been too long in getting out," and that it would soon be published in a journal.

Pettis and his team found that neonicotinoids were directly responsible for increasing bees' susceptibility to infectious diseases, even at levels so low that they are practically undetected. This fact alone debunks the myth perpetuated by Bayer and other neonicotinoid producers that the chemicals are safe when used "properly", because there, in fact, seems to be no proper or safe level.

"This new research from America confirms that at very, very low concentrations, neonicotinoid chemicals can make a honeybee vulnerable to fatal disease," said Matt Shardlow, director of the charity Buglife, to the Independent. "If these pesticides are causing large numbers of honeybees, bumblebees, solitary bees, hoverflies and moths to get sick and die from diseases they would otherwise have survived, then neonicotinoid chemicals could be the main cause of both colony collapse disorder and the loss of wild pollinator populations."

"The weight of evidence against neonicotinoids is becoming irresistible -- government should act now to ban the risky use of these toxins."

This memo summarizes the Environmental Fate and Effects Division’s (EFED) screening-levelEnvironmental Risk Assessment for clothianidin. The registrant, Bayer CropScience, is submitting a request for registration of clothianidin to be used as a seed treatment on cotton and mustard (oilseed and condiment). The major risk concerns are with aquatic free-swimming and benthic invertebrates, terrestrial invertebrates, birds, and mammals.

It has been going on for four years. In 2009 almost 29 percent of the bee colonies in the United States collapsed, say scientists who surveyed commercial beekeepers and brokers. That's slightly less than the 36 percent loss in 2008 and the 32 percent counted in 2007, but an informal survey just finished suggests that the die-off continues.

"Something is wrong out there," said David Mendes, a commercial beekeeper near Fort Myers, Fla., who is also president of the American Beekeeping Federation. "It may be something in the agricultural environment that's making them sicker and more vulnerable to illness.

"In many ways we view honeybees as an indicator species," like the proverbial canary in the coal mine, he said. "We don't know what's going on. And we all share the same earth."

Christopher Mullin of Penn State joined with several colleagues to take samples from beekeepers across 23 states, and found a wide variety of pesticides and other chemicals in the hives they examined. No one pesticide, they said, was strong enough to be lethal -- but they said it is possible that some of them are combining in some way that is not yet understood.

New addition to the site; Ways to get involved to help spread the word

MONSANTO - A GROWING MONOPOLY -A WEED IN OUR GARDEN

Working with a group of dedicated individuals for several months produced a great deal of information on GMOs in general and Monsanto specifically. Below is growing portion of those materials.

Who is Monsanto? AKA ''MonSatan.

Monsanto is a drug, chemical and biotech company with a long and terrible history of contamination, toxic products and a wildly arrogant disregard for anything like public health or safety. The Monsanto Watch Project of the Center for Food Safety says,

“Monsanto, best know today for its agricultural biotechnology products, has a long and dirty history of polluting this country and others with some of the most toxic compounds known to humankind. From PCBs to Agent Orange to Roundup, we have many reasons to question the motives of this company that claims to be working to reduce environmental destruction and feed the world with its genetically engineered food crops….

In the 1970s, Monsanto began manufacturing the herbicide Roundup, which has been marketed as a [sic] safe, general-purpose herbicide for widespread commercial and consumer use, even though its key ingredient, glyphosate, is a highly toxic poison for animals and humans. In 1997, The New York State Attorney General took Monsanto to court and Monsanto was subsequently forced to stop claiming that Roundup is “biodegradable” and “environmentally friendly.”

Monsanto has been repeatedly fined and ruled against for, among many things, mislabeling containers of Roundup, failing to report health data to EPA, and chemical spills and improper chemical deposition. In 1995, Monsanto ranked fifth among U.S. corporations in EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory, having discharged 37 million pounds of toxic chemicals into the air, land, water and underground. “

Monsanto-Resistant Weeds Take Root, Raising Food Prices

Monsanto's Roundup was supposed to make it easy for farmers to get rid of weeds, but it's working on fewer and fewer plants, including some monsters that can grow three inches a day and destroy farm equipment.

A new series of studies released by Weed Science this month finds at least 21 weed species have become resistant to the popular herbicide glyphosate (sold as Monsanto's Roundup), and a growing number survive multiple herbicides, so-called "super-weeds." The same selection pressure creating bacteria resistant to multiple antibiotics is leading to the rapid evolution of plants that survive modern herbicides. If the trend continues, yields could drop and food costs climb as weeds grow more difficult to uproot.

Over 270,000 Organic Farmers Sue Monsanto

“Nature, farming and health are all being affected by GMO contamination. We must protect our world by protecting our most precious, sacred resource of seed sovereignty. People must have the right to the resources of the earth for our sustenance.

We must have the freedom to farm that causes no harm to the environment or to other people. We must protect the environment, farmers’ livelihood, public health and people’s right to non GMO food contamination.”

Because Monsanto has sued US and Canadian farmers in the past when their patented genetic material has inadvertently contaminated their crops, the organic plaintiffs decided to sue Monsanto preemptively to protect themselves from being accused of patent infringement should their crops ever become contaminated by Monsanto’s genetically modified seed.

Monsanto to Sell Biotech Sweet Corn for U.S. Consumers - NOT JUST FOR SWEETNERS, AND ANIMAL FEED ANYMORE

Monsanto Co. (MON), the world’s biggest vegetable seed maker, said it will begin selling genetically modified sweet corn in the U.S. this year, the first product it has developed for the consumer market.

The sweet corn seeds are engineered to kill insects living above and below ground and to tolerate applications of the company’s Roundup herbicide, Consuelo Madere, Monsanto vice president for vegetables, told reporters at company headquarters in St. Louis today. They will be introduced to growers serving the U.S. fresh corn market starting in the autumn, she said.

Monsanto previously sold only engineered crops that are processed into sugars and oils, used as animal feed* or made into fibers. The new seeds will initially target the 250,000-acre market for fresh corn in the eastern U.S., Madere said. Monsanto is in discussions with companies that would can or freeze the corn, she said.

OUR HEARTS ALL SPEAK THE SAME LANGUAGE

Please email the administrator cthepower@gmail.com if there is something you need help with or if there is something you would like to add. Thank you for taking the time to be here. Return to the top (Here).